National Green Tribunal
News Item Forest Guard Mowed Down By ... vs . Uoi, on 28 January, 2022
Author: Adarsh Kumar Goel
Bench: Adarsh Kumar Goel
Item No. 06 (Court No. 1)
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
(By Video Conferencing)
Original Application No. 154/2020
(With report dated 25.01.2022)
In re: News item published on 27.07.2020 in the local daily named "Times
of India" titled "Forest guard mowed down by 'mining mafia' in
Sariska"
Date of hearing: 28.01.2022
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, CHAIRPERSON
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR AGARWAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. NAGIN NANDA, EXPERT MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. AFROZ AHMAD, EXPERT MEMBER
Respondent: Mr. Vikrant Pachnanda, Advocate for CPCB
Mr. Nishant Awana, Advocate for RSPCB
ORDER
1. Proceedings in this matter have been initiated based on media report1 dated 27.07.2020 under the heading "Forest guard mowed down by 'mining mafia' in Sariska". The report is to the effect that a forest guard was mowed down by a tractor belonging to suspected mining mafia inside Sariska Tiger Reserve on Sunday after he attempted to stop them along with his colleague. The guard was rushed to a hospital where he succumbed to injuries. Cops are yet to arrest the accused, but have seized the tractor. This is not the first time that forest officials have been attacked inside the Sariska Tiger Reserve. The deceased has been identified as Keval 1 News item published in Times of India 1 Singh. He was in his mid - 40s. Sariska Tiger Reserve (STR), DFO Seduram Yadav said, "On Sunday, the guard along with his colleague went for patrol in Baldevgarh checkpost area of the tiger reserve where they saw certain individuals illegally transporting bajri from the forest area. When the guards tried to stop them, they mowed him down with a tractor. This is not the first time that villagers have attacked forest officials. On January 25, a forest ranger of STR Jitendra Chaudhary had to run for his life after being attacked by villagers. The villagers attacked him after he and his 10-member team confiscated 18 sheeps and 30 goats for illegal grazing in the tiger reserve. On December 15, 2019, senior forest officials were allegedly manhandled by villagers in the tiger reserve. Following this, a case against 20 identified accused was registered at the Bansur police station. The reserve is spread across 1,281 sq. km. area and is divided into six ranges. There are just 108 forest guards, which is far less than its sanctioned strength of 132. Moreover, with the menace of frequent attacks in Sariska, unarmed forest guards often struggle to protect the area."
2. The matter was earlier considered on 10.08.2020. It was observed that there was failure of oversight regulatory mechanism in enforcing provision of the Wildlife (Protection), Act, 1972 and Sustainable Sand Mining Guidelines, 2020. Accordingly, a joint Committee comprising State PCB, District Magistrate, Alwar and PCCF (HoFF), Rajasthan was constituted to take further remedial action and to file a report specifically mentioning estimate of illegal mining, number of mines sanctioned in the area and regulatory mechanism to check the illegal mining in the said eco sensitive area.
2
3. Progress in the matter was reviewed on 06.04.2021 in the light of report dated 15.02.2021 filed by DCF, Sariska Tiger Reserve, Rajasthan. The Tribunal found that illegal mining was still continuing, even without requisite consents. The Tribunal constituted a Joint Committee comprising MoEF&CC, CPCB, State PCB, Chief Wildlife Warden, SEIAA, Rajasthan and District Magistrate, Alwar to study the carrying capacity of the area and to take further action based on such study, to prevent unsustainable mining activities. Relevant extracts from the said order are quoted below:
"xxx .......................................xxx..................................xxx
3. Accordingly, DCF, Sariska Tiger Reserve, Rajasthan has filed a report on 15.02.2021 giving the list of mining within 10 kms. of the Sariska Tiger Reserve with the steps taken to control illegal mining in the said eco sensitive zone. The annexure to the report is an action taken report by Member Secretary, Forest Conservation and Director, Sariska Tiger Reserve, Alwar to the effect that eco sensitive zone of Sariska Tiger Reserve has not been notified yet. 157 mines exist within 10 km. of the said Tiger Reserve. There is also a report by the State PCB dated 29.12.2020 to the effect that out of 157 mining leases, 69 leases are having valid consent to operate from the State PCB, 17 have applied for consent to operate and remaining 71 have not applied for consent to operate. 88 mines are not working.
4. We have heard learned Counsel for the appearing parties. Order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 11.12.2018, in WP 2020/1995, TN Godavarman v. UOI, is as follows:
"The learned ASG has informed us that there are 104 National Parks and 558 Wildlife Sanctuaries making a total of 662 National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries in the country.
The proposals for declaring areas around these National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries as Eco Sensitive Zone have been received from State Governments / UT Administrations for 641 National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries. No proposals have been received in respect of 21 National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries.
The proposals have been accepted and Notification has been issued in respect of 289 National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries as on 26.11.2018 and draft Notification has been prepared in respect of 206 National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries.
The declaration with regard to Eco Sensitive Zone is under process with the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate 3 Change (MoEF) as well as with the State Governments in respect of 146 National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries.
We expect the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change to actively pursue the preparation of the draft Notification and to issue a final Notification at the earliest.
The proposals for 21 National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries in respect of which proposals have not yet been received by the MOEF are as follows:-
ASSAM
1. Pobitora Sanctuary JAMMU AND KASHMIR
2. Hemis High Altitude National Park
3. Kishtewar National Park
4. Changthang Sanctuary
5. Hokersar Sanctuary
6. Trikuta Sanctuary KARNATAKA
7. Jogimatti Sanctuary
8. Thimlapura Sanctuary
9. Yadahalli Chinkara Sanctuary MAHARASHTRA
10. Deolgaon Rehekuri Sanctuary
11. Thane Creek Flamingo Sanctuary
12. Malvan Marine Sanctuary MANIPUR
13. Siroi National Park
14. Khongjaingamba Ching Sanctuary MEGHALAYA
15. Baghmara Pitcher Plant Sanctuary NAGALAND
16. Fakim Sanctuary
17. Puliebadze Sanctuary
18. Rangapahar Sanctuary UTTAR PRADESH
19. Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar Bird Sanctuary
20. Pilibhit Sanctuary WEST BENGAL
21. Jorepokhri Sanctuary It is submitted by the learned Amicus that this issue has been pending since sometime in December, 2006. 12 years have gone-
by but no effective steps have been taken by the State Governments in respect of the National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries mentioned above.
4 Under the circumstances, we direct that an area of 10 Kms around these 21 National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries be declared as Eco Sensitive Zone by the MoEF. The declaration be made by the MoEF at the earliest.
Liberty is granted to the State Governments to move an application for modification of this order along with proposal only two weeks after submission of the proposals to the MoEF."
5. Following the above order, this Tribunal vide order dated 20.12.2018 in Appeal No. 48/2016, Nityendra Manav vs. UOI, prohibited mining within 10 km of Sariska Tiger Reserve and quashed the EC in question against which appeal was filed before the Tribunal. Relevant part of the order is reproduced below:
"xxx......................xxx...................................xxx Learned Counsel for respondent brought to our notice an order issued by Hon'ble Supreme Court on 11-12-2018 in WP (C) No. 202/1995 wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court had ordered that in respect of 21 National Parks/Sanctuary, the Eco-
sensitive zone will be 10 kms as the proposal for the same had not been sent to MoEF by the States. The Learned Counsel for the respondent tried to make a distinction that in this case the Government of Rajasthan had sent the proposal to MoEF and it is pending consideration by MoEF.
It is the admitted position that the final notification of Eco-sensitive zone for Sariska Tiger Reserve/Sanctuary is yet to be issued by the MoEF. We, therefore, direct that all mining activities of any mineral will be stopped within 10 kms of the boundary of Sariska Tiger Reserve/Wildlife Sanctuary till mining leases are cleared by the standing committee of the National Board of Wildlife. All the ECs of the mining leases may be referred to the standing Committee of the NBWL. In case MoEF issues final notification on Eco-sensitive Zone, the mining lease which fall within the Eco-sensitive Zone will have to have clearance of the standing committee of the NBWL."
6. In view of above, it is necessary for the authorities to take further remedial measures to enforce the law of the land. The State PCB and District Magistrate, Alwar may take steps to stop operation of mining leases, operating illegally, without requisite consents and also to examine whether the leases for which consents are given are permissible. The State PCB may also recover compensation for damage to the environment by illegal mining activities, following due process. on 'Polluter Pays' principle.
7. Though counsel appears for the MoEF&CC, she says that she has no instructions. Let the State of Rajasthan and the MoEF&CC take further steps in the light of order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court for issuance of requisite notification for declaring the area around the Tiger Reserves to be eco 5 sensitive zone for protection of the said Reserve. The State of Rajasthan may furnish the requisite proposal in the light of Guidelines dated 09.02.2011 issued by the MoEF&CC to all the Chief Wildlife Wardens for eco sensitive zones.
8. We further direct constitution of a joint Committee comprising MoEF&CC, CPCB, State PCB, Chief Wildlife Warden, SEIAA, Rajasthan and District Magistrate, Alwar to conduct a study about the carrying capacity of the area to sustain the mining activities on 'Sustainable Development' principle. The CPCB and State PCB will be the nodal agency for compliance and coordination. The joint Committee may give its report within three months by e-mail at judicial- [email protected] preferably in the form of searchable PDF/ OCR Support PDF and not in the form of Image PDF.
9. The MoEF&CC and State of Rajasthan may also file their respective action taken reports in the matter by e-mail at judicial- [email protected] preferably in the form of searchable PDF/ OCR Support PDF and not in the form of Image PDF, before the next date."
4. After the above order, the same issue came up for consideration before this Tribunal on 15.11.2021 in OA No. 45/2020(CZ), Mukesh Sharma vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. After referring to the earlier orders on the subject and considering compliance report dated 15.11.2021 filed in the said matter and also ESZ Notification dated 04.03.2021, the Tribunal observed and directed:
"xxx .................................... xxx ............................. xxx
11. It may be difficult to understand why o km distance is eco sensitive zone at some places. However, it cannot mean that mining is permissible anywhere beyond the said area. Appropriate EC or Consent orders have to specify location for mining. List of activities prohibited is mentioned in the said draft notification as follows:
" Sl. Activity Description No. A. Prohibited Activities
1. Commercial (a) All new and existing mining mining, stone (minor and major minerals), quarrying and stone quarrying and crushing crushing units units shall be prohibited with immediate effect except for meeting the domestic needs of bona fide local residents including digging of earth for construction or repair of 6 houses within Eco-sensitive Zone;
(b) The mining operations shall be carried out in accordance with the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 4th August, 2006 in the matter of T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad Vs. UOI in W.P.(C) No. 202 of 1995 and dated 21st April, 2014 in the "
matter of Goa Foundation Vs. UOI in W.P.(C) No. 435 of 2012.
12. We are of the view that the Chief Wildlife Warden/MoEF&CC need to clarify the boundaries to avoid any confusion.
13. We note that proceedings before this Tribunal in OA No. 154/2020 are based on News item published on 27.07.2020 in the local daily "Times of India" titled "Forest guard mowed down by 'mining mafia' in Sariska". Therein, the Tribunal considered the matter in the light of report of the DCF, Sriska Tiger Reserve, Rajasthan dated 15.02.2021 giving list of mining within 10 kms of the STR and steps taken to control illegal mining. The Tribunal also noted the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court about declaration of ESZ areas and earlier orders of this Tribunal. The Tribunal constituted a joint Committee and further action is to be taken after receipt of report of the joint Committee. The operative part of the order is reproduced below:
Xxxxxxxxxxxx quoted part of the order already quoted earlier
14. From the above, it is seen that in the present case, the mines were operating in violation earlier order of this Tribunal dated 20.12.2018 which still holds the field and also against the guidelines of the MoEF&CC mentioned above. The State PCB has refused consent to operate and State Authorities have taken action to close the illegally operating mines. Such orders are statutorily appealable under the NGT Act, 2010 and no such appeal has been filed. In absence of such appeal having been filed, prima-facie, there is nothing wrong with the orders passed by the State PCB as well as other authorities, in compliance of operational guidelines of MoEF&CC as well as earlier order of this Tribunal which are still operating. We asked learned Counsel for the Project Proponents (PPs) whether earlier orders of this Tribunal prohibiting mining in buffer zone of the ESZ are still operative to which only answer is that the said orders have been challenged but neither stayed nor set aside. It is also not disputed that MoEF&CC guidelines do not allow mining.
15. Accordingly, in view of order of closure of illegally operating mines and refusal of consent to operate, the statutory regulators may take further action against illegal 7 mining and transportation of illegally mined material, as per law, by way of prosecution and recovery of compensation on "Polluter Pays" principle. We also note that the photographs show that overburden from the mines is being illegally dumped on common land outside leased area for which the State PCB needs to take further action. Observations in the report of the State PCB that the quantity of the overburden is negligible cannot be accepted and need to be revisited by some higher-
level officer. The conduct of the officer giving the report that the overburden is negligible is open to scrutiny by the Member Secretary, State PCB. The Chief Wildlife Warden, Rajasthan/MoEF&CC may consider rationalizing/clarifying any confusion in the boundaries of ESZ in the light of observations in paras 11 and 12 above."
5. In pursuance of order dated 06.04.2021 in the present matter, report of the Joint Committee dated 25.01.2022 has been filed. Some extracts from the report containing data, summary and recommendations in the report as follows:
"2.2 Mining area There are 157 mines (Total lease area 353.14 Ha) situated within the periphery of 10Kms of Sariska Sanctuary boundary. The mining leases are allotted on non-forest land (revenue land). These 157 mines are spread in 08 mine clusters situated in South & South- West of the Sariska boundary. Out of these 157 mines, 33 scattered mines are also situated around the boundary. The cluster-wise distribution of the mines is as tabulated below:
S. Mine cluster Total No. Type of mines No. of mines
1. Baldeogarh, Rajgarh 09 Marble mines 2. Goverdhanpura, Rajgarh 20 3. Kho, Rajgarh 28 4. Mallana, Rajgarh 08 5. Palpur, Rajgarh 05 6. Tilwad, Rajgarh 20 7. Jhiri 12 8. Kalsikalan Gwada 22 Marble (10), Masonry (15), Limestone (5),
9. Scattered mines 33 Barite (1), Soap stone (1) & Iron ore (1) The details of the 157 mine lease are enclosed as Annexure-IV.8
The geographical location (point co-ordinates) of the consented mine cluster and scattered mines are as tabulated below:
S. Name of Cluster Latitude Longitude No. 1 Baldevgarh, Rajgarh 27.14225278 76.38319167 2 Gordhanpura, Rajgarh 27.20248889 76.43303889 3 Kho, Rajgarh 27.19617222 76.38835 4 Mallana, Rajgarh 27.21539167 76.41168333 5 Palpur, Rajgarh 27.19508611 76.39330556 6 Tilwad, Rajgarh 27.21311 76.394588 7 Jhiri, Thanagazi, 27.22298611 76.22729722 8 Kalsi Kala Gwada, Thanagazi 27.24256667 76.22426111 9 Scattered mines (13) S. No. Latitude Longitude
1. 27.19087 76.38603333
2. 27.19099 76.38594722
3. 27.18954 76.38512778
4. 27.16374 76.41625278
5. 27.16354 76.37376944
6. 27.19465 76.37376944
7. 27.2068 76.23935556
8. 27.51311 76.27125
9. 27.51282 76.27221111
10. 27.12746 76.19409722
11. 27.36625 76.29519167
12. 27.36634 76.29661667
13. 27.20288 76.23814444 The distribution of 157 mine leases in 10Kms from the boundary of Sariska Wildlife Sanctuary is as tabulated below:
Sl. Name of 1-<2 2-<3 3-<4 4- 5-<6 6-<7 7-<8 8-<9 9-<10 10 Total No. Clusters Km Km Km <5 Km Km Km km Km Km Mine Km
1. Baldeogarh, 1 --- --- -- --- 3 5 --- --- --- 9 Rajgarh
2. Goverdhan -- -- 9 11 -- -- -- -- -- -- 20 pura, Rajgarh
3. Kho, Rajgarh 6 20 2 -- --- --- --- -- -- -- 2 8
4. Mallana, -- -- 8 -- --- --- --- --- --- --- 8 Rajgarh
5. Palpur, -- 5 -- -- -- -- -- --- -- -- 5 Rajgarh
6. Tilwad- 15 5 -- -- --- --- --- --- -- --- 20 Rajgarh
7. Jhiri -- -- -- -- 12 --- -- --- ---- --- 12
8. Kalsikala, -- --- --- - 1 7 13 --- --- 1 22 Gawda
9. Scattered 10 6 -- 1 8 2 2 1 -- 3 33 Mines Total mines 32 36 19 12 21 12 20 1 -- 4 157 9 2.2.1 Status of environmental clearance & consent to operate:
The details of the environmental clearance granted by SEIAA/DEIAA under Category B2 projects and the consent to establish & consent to operate granted by Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board is as tabulated below:
S. No. Mine cluster Total Environmental Consent to No. of Clearance Operate mines Granted Not- Granted granted 1. Baldeogarh, Rajgarh 09 08 01 08 2. Goverdhanpura, 20 09 11 06 Rajgarh 3. Kho, Rajgarh 28 26 02 26 4. Mallana, Rajgarh 08 05 03 05 5. Palpur, Rajgarh 05 04 01 04 6. Tilwad, Rajgarh 20 04 16 03 7. Jhiri 12 08 04 08 8. Kalsikalan Gwada 22 14 08 11 9. Scattered mines 33 13 20 13 Total 157 91 66 84 Out of 157 mine lease, 91 were granted environmental clearance from SEIAA/DEIAA. 86 marble mines & 05 scattered mines of Masonry mines were granted EC. Out of these, 91 mines lease, 84 were granted consent to operate (CTO). The categorization of these 84 mine lease as per their area (in hectare) is as tabulated below:
Area (in Hectare) No. of mines Upto 1 Ha 54 1-2 Ha 11 2-4 Ha 14 4-5Ha 04 5-10Ha 01 (10.186Ha
Note: 83 mine lease area was below 5Ha.
2.2.2 Status of distance of mine from sanctuary boundary The distribution of the 42 mine (valid as on 31.12.2021) from the sanctuary boundary is as tabulated below:10
Item No. of Mines lying in the Distance Range from Sanctuary Boundary Distance 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 7-8 Range km km km km km km km km No. of mines 0 10 30 8 6 10 9 11 No. of Valid 0 05 14 03 05 06 04 05 mines as on 31.12.2021 As per the mine department record, none of the mine falls in the 1Km distance from the sanctuary boundary.
2.2.3 Status of mines consent As per the Consent to Operate (CTO) issued by RSPCB, following numbers of mines has valid consent as on 31.12.2021 in the area:
S. Mine cluster Consent to Valid CTO as on No . Operate 31.12.2021 Granted to 1. Baldeogarh, Rajgarh 08* 00 2. Goverdhanpura, Rajgarh 06 04 3. Kho, Rajgarh 26 12 4. Mallana, Rajgarh 05 02 5. Palpur, Rajgarh 04 04 6. Tilwad, Rajgarh 03 02 7. Jhiri 08 05 8. Kalsikalan Gwada 11 07 9. Scattered mines 13 06 Total 84 42 Total Area of mine lease 144.83 Ha 54.39 Ha Note: *In compliance of Hon'ble NGT (CZ) order dated 7.7.2021 in O.A. 45 of 2020 in the matter of Mukesh Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan; all the Consent to Operate of 08 mine lease of Baldeogarh, Rajgarh were revoked. Copy of the Mining department Office order is enclosed as Annexure-V. Copy of the total 84 consented mines leases and 42 consented leases as on 31.12.2021 is enclosed as Annexure-VI.
Consented capacity of production of 84 mines is as tabulated below:
S. Mine cluster Consent to Consented Approx. Daily No. Operate capacity in Production Granted to TPA (Tons/day @ 300 days/year)
1. Baldeogarh, Rajgarh 08 811691 2706
2. Goverdhanpura, Rajgarh 06 498374 1661
3. Kho, Rajgarh 26 2587554 8625 11
4. Mallana, Rajgarh 05 573700 1912 5. Palpur, Rajgarh 04 261376 871
6. Tilwad, Rajgarh 03 487420 1625
7. Jhiri 08 641305 2138
8. Kalsikalan Gwada 11 1000267 3334
9. Scattered mines 13 1488448 4961 Total 84 8350135 27834 Considering 300days of annual operation, the daily average production from single mine on an average is 330 TPD. The details of the 42valid consent mines w.r.t. consented capacity, validity of CTO, area and distance from Sariska sanctuary boundary is as tabulated below:
S.NO. ML. NO. NAME OF LESSEE AREA DISTANCE CTO Consented IN FROM VALIDITY capacity (HECT.) BOUNDARY AND (TPA) OF CAPACITY SANCTUARY (KM.)
1. 67/97 DEEPAK MINING COMPNY 1 2.299KM. 31.03.2023 125270
2. Feb-96 M/S RAJSTHAN MINERAL 1 2.625KM. 30.09.2022 84160 & TRADERS
3. 40/97 SH.PARMOD GOYAL 1 2.315KM. 31.08.2022 48000
4. 35/97 SH. DWARKA PARSAD 0.6347 2.514KM. 28.02.2022 45376 MEENA
5. 33/96 SH. RAMKESH MEENA 1.188 2.172.KM. 30.04.2022 7500
6. 51/96 ABHISHKE SHARMA 0.8625 2.393KM. 30.06.2022 45000
7. 104/01 SH.B.L.MEENA 4.263 3.721M 31.10.2022 302380
8. 66/96 M/S VISHV MARBLE 1 4.409KM. 30.04.2022 39310 COMPANY PVT. LTD.
9. 133/04 SH. MANJU SHARMA 4 2.511KM. 28.02.2022 163500
10. 54/02 PALPUR MINING COMPNY 4 1.999KM. 31.05.2023 40000
11. 56/02 PALPUR MINING 4 1.949KM. 31.05.2023 40000 COMPANY 261/06 SH.12.
MAAN SHINGH 1.24 1.867KM. 31.07.2022 250000 MEENA 120/07 SH.
13. RANJIT SHINGH 0.8 3.835KM. 31.08.2022 34430 335/09 SH.MOOLCHAND 14. MEENA 1 6.435KM. 30.06.2022 75920 39/99 RADHEY 15. KRISHNA GRANITE 1 1.483KM. 28.02.2022 104900 AND MARBLES 267/88 SH.ASHOK 16. GUPTA 1 2.276M 31.03.2022 54000 199/86 RAJESH 17. SHARMA 1 2.518KM. 31.05.2022 113260 208/84 M/S 18.YASH MARBLE 4.3625 3.223KM. 31.03.2022 154900 922/88 SMT 19.MAYA GAOYAL 1 2.406KM. 31.03.2022 30000 46/88 M/S 20.RAM NARAYAN & 1 2.307KM. 30.04.2022 100000 BROTHERS 923/88 SH. 21. SANTOSH SHARMA 1.7 2.294KM. 31.03.2022 104186 246/85 M/S 22.SHREE RAM 1 2.605KM. 30.04.2022 100000 MINERAL 217/86 SH. 23. RADHY SHYAM 1 4.681KM. 31.03.2022 60000 GUPTA 12 49/86 SH. 24. SAMPTRAM 1 4.483KM. 30.04.2022 90000 CHOUDHRY 148/85 SH. 25. PARDEEP PARIK 1 1.332KM. 30.04.2022 126520 Jul-87 SH. 26. SUBE SHING 1 4.277KM. 31.07.2023 122304 34/96 M/S 27.ARPIT PVT. LTD. 1 5.214KM. 31.01.2022 160000 35/96 M/S 28.ARPIT PVT. LTD. 1 5.257KM. 31.01.2022 170000 158/81 SH. 29. CHANDRA SHEKHAR 1.7779 7.416KM. 28.02.2023 82730 (9/93) GUPTA 815/88 M/S 30.DIKSHIT MARBLE 1 5.938KM. 31.10.2022 43500 87/97 M/S 31.MANSI MINERAL 1 5.483KM. 31.03.2023 36000 30/96 ANDHI 32. MINERAL AND 1 5.553KM. 28.02.2022 18000 MARBLE 1767/91 SH. 33. RAKESH MEENA 1 6.158KM. 28.02.2022 160000 1770/91 SH. 34. RAKESH MEENA 1 6.115KM. 28.02.2022 168000 327/88 SHARMA 35. MARBLE AND 1 7.202KM. 31.07.2022 54920 MINERAL 39/96 SH. 36. KELASH CHANDRA 1 5.400KM. 30.11.2022 20000 GUPTA 43/94 SITARAM 37. SAINI 1 2.481KM 30.06.2022 108888 103/01 AMBIKA 38. MARBLE 0.56 4.953KM. 31.03.2022 10000 834/88 MAHEHWARI 39. KNWAR 1 6.631KM. 31.05.2023 96967 Dec-85 SH. 40. RAMAVTAR KUMHAR 1 7.263KM. 30.9.2022 63390 91/98 TEZ 41.RAM SAINI 1 7.580KM. 30.04.2023 54000 92/98 TEZ 42.RAM SAINI 1 7.380KM. 30.04.2023 54000
➢ The total consented capacity of the 42 mines is 37,61,311TPA (12538TPD). Mines operate for 08 Hrs with total 300 operational days in a year.
5.0 Summary:
The 157 mines (total 353.14 Ha lease area) are majorly situated in South & South-West of the Sariska Wildlife Sanctuary. The 84 mines have obtained environmental clearance and Consent to Operate from the authority's viz. SEIAA/DEIAA and RSPCB. The mines operate for about 300days annually (8 hours daily during 8AM to 5PM). The sources of air pollution within the mining lease area are drilling, exposed pit area, exposed dump area, overburden loading & unloading and transportation on haul road. The activity-wise emission load study w.r.t. the mining operation indicates that movement of tippers/trucks on the haul roads (inside the mine lease area) contribute as high as 91% for 1 ha area mine and 87% for a 4.263 ha area mine.13
Contribution to surrounding air quality as a function of distance indicates that PM10 concentration reduces significantly as we move away from the mine. At a distance of 1 km, the contribution from 1 ha and 4.263 ha mine could be 5.4 jig/m3 and 13 jig/m3. This concentration represents 8 hourly time duration of mining activity, whereas for the remaining 15-16 hours of day, there may be negligible activity, thus reducing 24 hourly concentrations drastically. The supportive capacity assessed (2020) for the airshed falling under 25KMs radial distance from the centre of the Sariska Sanctuary based on the available PM10 & PM2.5 monitoring data of nearest city i.e. Alwar and satellite (AOD) data of PM2.5 & mixing height as per the IMD atlas indicate that in the month of February & November the supportive capacity got exhausted w.r.t. the permissible capacity. Site- specific air quality monitoring and meteorological data will give more accurate assessment of the supportive capacity. The metaled road and proper water sprinkling along with plantation may reduce the dust generation from the haul roads significantly.
6.0 Recommendations:
1. Among the various activities during the mine operation, movement of trucks/tippers on the haul roads (within the mine lease area) and upto the main road becomes the major source of air pollution, therefore each mine lease holder has to ensure proper and regular sprinkling of water on the haul road and the road till the main road to minimize the dust emissions.
2. Each mine lease holder is to strictly comply with the EC conditions and consent to operate conditions and carryout periodic monitoring of the ambient air in consultation with RSPCB. Based on such database, periodic assessment of the supportive capacity may be done by RSPCB to regulate the mines.
3. During the field visit, it was observed that mined out materials were dumped at many places outside the mining lease area, fine fraction of which may contribute to air pollution due to winds. Such mined out materials lying outside the mine lease area may be suitably disposed of/ utilized by the concerned mine lease holders or by the Mining Department.
4. To minimize the direct & indirect impact on the forest & wildlife, air quality, road etc. of the periphery of sariska sanctuary due to the mines operating in South & South-West of the Sanctuary, part of the funds contributed by the mine lease holders of the Alwar district to District Mineral Foundation (DMF) may be utilized. The amount (to the tune of 0.5% or 14 so) may be allocated to the State Govt. foundation "Sariska Tiger Conservation Foundation" for the betterment/management of forest & wildlife activities of Sariska Tiger Reserve and towards welfare activities of nearby villagers.
5. In view of large number of mines in the vicinity of wildlife sanctuary (STR), a detailed study on "assessment of the cumulative impact of all the mines located in the region including transportation on the surrounding environment" needs to be conducted by a nationally reputed institute. Environmental management plans so derived from the study will need to be adopted by the concerned stakeholders.
Such study may be conducted by the Mining Association or RSPCB. This is also important from the fact that various data used in the present analysis have been taken from different sources and region- specific data needs to be established to ensure environmentally sustainable operation of mines."
6. To the extent of violations found in the report, remedial action is certainly required and we direct the same to be taken but that may not be enough. Various aspects have been ignored in the report which call for further action. The report relies on the air quality data of Covid-19 period which is not representative of the actual state of affairs in normal times and conclusion on that basis to permit mining without fresh appraisal of relevant data will not be permissible. The conclusion in the report quoted below cannot be accepted for the said reason:
"3.1.6 Summary & Conclusion Most of the Marble mines in Alwar district around Sariska are having small mine lease area, mostly in the range of 1.0 ha - 4 ha, maximum number being of 1.0 ha mine. The modelling results indicate that the activities within small mines do not affect the surrounding air quality significantly, and the impact remains mostly within the mine lease area, unless there is high wind speed.
Contribution to surrounding air quality as a function of distance is given in Table 4, which indicates that PM10 concentration reduces significantly as we move away from the mine. At a distance of 1 km, the contribution from 1 ha and 4.263 ha mine could be 5.4 jig/m3 and 13 jig/m3. This concentration represents 8 hourly time duration of mining activity, whereas for the remaining 15-16 hours of day, 15 there may be negligible activity, thus reducing 24 hourly concentrations drastically."
7. The conclusions in the report about the supportive capacity cannot, thus, be conclusive to the extent the same is based on covid time data when there was lockdown and no mining was happening. Fresh exercise is required for arriving at correct conclusion of permissibility of mining in the area in the light correct data of air quality.
8. Further, the extract from the report shows that EC has been granted by SEIAA/DEIAA in respect of mining leases within 10 kms of ESZ. As per general condition appended to the EIA Notification dated 14.09.2006, if the area is within 10 km of the ESZ, EC can be granted only as per procedure applicable to category 'A' projects. The said general condition is reproduced below:
"General Condition (GC):
Any project or activity specified in Category 'B' will be treated as Category 'A', if located in whole or in part within 10 km from the boundary of:................... (iii) Eco-sensitive areas as notified under section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, such as, ........................
......................................................................."
9. In view of above, only valid EC for grant of mining, which is a mandatory condition for permitting such activity, can be in accordance with the EC by the MoEF&CC and not by SEIAA/DEIAA who are not authorised to deal with projects of A category nor State Board can grant consent based on such EC. Any such EC/consent already granted will have to be treated as void and any illegal mining conducted without valid EC/Consent has to be visited with the adverse consequences, following due process of law. The compensation for illegal mining needs to be 16 assessed and recovered which, according to directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Common Cause Vs. UoI & Ors.,2 has to be 100% of the value of the mined material in view of provisions of Section 21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. Further, as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jayant vs The State of Madhya Pradesh, (2021) 2 SCC 670, apart from illegal mining being dealt with as per mining and environmental laws, the same has to be dealt with as an offence of theft under IPC. We also note that as per provisions of the PMLA Act, 2002, proceeds of activity in violation of environmental laws, specified in the Schedule to the said Act, amount to offence under Section 3 of the said Act for which action has to be taken by ED against violators and facilitators, including concerned authorities permitting illegality.
10. The proceedings in this matter were initiated in the light of the media report projecting failure of rule of law in controlling mining mafias and extent of crime prevailing resulting in killing of a forest guard by vehicle belonging to mining mafia inside the 'Sariska Tiger Reserve'. It is a matter of serious concern that a forest guard lost his life at the hands of law violators in the course of illegal mining in the reserved forest. Such victimization of law enforcers need to be prevented and the heirs of the victims need to be duly compensated by the State which should not be less than Rs.15 lacs, which is minimum amount payable in an accident case on the principle of Sarla Verma (2009) 6 SCC 121 as well as in Uphaar Tragedy case (2011) 14 SCC 481. We direct the State of Rajasthan through the Chief Secretary to ensure such payment within one month, if no compensation has so far been paid. If compensation paid is less than the 2 (2017) 9 SCC 499 17 said amount, the balance may now be paid. If more compensation has already been paid, no recovery be effected.
11. The matter of illegal mining in 'Sariska Tiger Reserve' was already being dealt with in other matters and has since been dealt with inter-alia vide order dated 15.11.2021 in OA No. 45/2020(CZ), Mukesh Sharma vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. and is also being further dealt with above in the light of the report received and commented upon above. In the light thereof, the concerned statutory authorities may take further remedial action for enforcement of rule of law. The State needs to take steps to prevent such incidents in any such reserved forest, wildlife sanctuary and the national park. MoEF&CC also needs to monitor this aspect in the interest of protection of environment.
12. Having regard to seriousness of the violations which are continuing without adequate check, we direct the Chief Secretary, Rajasthan to oversee compliance with the assistance of DGP, Rajasthan, PCCF (HoFF), Rajasthan, Chief Wildlife Warden, Rajasthan, Field Director, Sariska Tiger Reserve, Rajasthan State PCB, SSP and District Magistrate, Alwar. The Chief Secretary may hold a meeting with the concerned officers within one month to review all the ECs/Consents granted. Since carrying capacity assessment has not been found to be based on reliable data, the same needs to be independently considered in the course of grant of any EC/Consent. We also direct that a copy of this order be forwarded to the Director ED for such further action as may be found necessary, as per law.
The application is disposed of.
A copy of this order be forwarded to MoEF&CC, the Chief Secretary, Rajasthan to oversee compliance with the assistance of DGP, Rajasthan, 18 PCCF (HoFF), Rajasthan, Chief Wildlife Warden, Rajasthan, Field Director, Sariska Tiger Reserve', Rajasthan State PCB, SSP and District Magistrate, Alwar and Director ED by e-mail for compliance.
Adarsh Kumar Goel, CP Sudhir Agarwal, JM Dr. Nagin Nanda, EM Dr. Afroz Ahmad, EM January 28, 2022 Original Application No. 154/2020 DV 19